[JURIST] Ranking Republican on the US Senate Judiciary Committee [official website] Jeff Sessions (R-AL) [official website] opposed the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor [WH profile] on Monday, maintaining that she lacks "deep-rooted convictions" [USA Today editorial] needed to resist judicial activism. Although Sessions conceded that Sotomayor will likely be confirmed, he wrote that liberals "might find it a Pyrrhic victory." Referring to statements made by the nominee before the committee, Sessions claimed that she dismissed her prior statements about the role that personal experience plays in judicial decision-making in an attempt to "rebrand" her previously stated approach. Sessions questioned her testimony, saying:

Why not defend the philosophy she had articulated so carefully over the years? Because the American people overwhelmingly reject the notion that unelected judges should set policy or allow their social, moral, or political views to influence the outcome of cases. Rather, the public wants and expects restrained courts, tethered to the Constitution, and judges who impartially apply the law to the facts. In the end, her testimony served as a repudiation of judicial activism.